You know them from their chips, Marvell network controller and SSD controllers. Well, Marvell lost a lawsuit to a University over a patent.Â*A Pittsburgh federal jury on Wednesday awarded Carnegie Mel...

This really pisses me off, for several reasons. First of all, colleges and universities are supposed to welcome innovation and encourage the production of tomorrow's products, not stifle it. MIT does almost the exact opposite as CM where they seem to almost give away their stuff, or welcome people to a license. The next problem is this seemed very deliberate of CM. They probably knew about Marvell making these products for years but intentionally waited so the lawsuit fines could be higher. My last problem is why does CM care? They're not mass producing hardware manufacturers, and companies like WD are not going to drop Marvell. Seriously, the school is just pulling an Apple here. I lost all respect for them.

You lot take the biscuit! So if you lot invented something that had the potential to make loads of money for you and your shareholders you wouldn't defend that patent if someone stole your IP?

Patents protect property rights and are necessary to stop unscrupulous companies profiting off the hard work and innovation of others. From that has sprung a secondary industry of patent purchase and sale for profit, or to prevent another company extending their market share.

I see it all as just good business.

Universities are not in the business of groundbreaking innovation to give away. They do it to make money as well as further their reputation and prestige.

The universities in the UK working on graphene will not be giving away the technology. They will be patenting every damn thing they can and good luck to them.

There was a time if someone could take something and improve it and profit it wasn't frowned on. Current IP is to stifle Innovationg and just sit on it and wait for someone to actually do something (or something similar) with it so you can just make money off them since you had no interest in working on actually creating or doing things with ones IP

If you create something and someone else can do it better and make money too bad is my view you can't have empty rules to have the government work for you.

I laugh at western countries these days there are like dog feces on the bottom of my shoe. The good days of innovation are dead thanks to this kind of madness.
I just hope one day this can be fixed before it is too late but at current rate it will only get worse I have seen enough companies killed off from this garbage

: a selfish and excessive desire for more of something (as money) than is needed "

As I said earlier greed is want not need so in a round about way you agree with my premiss. Next think about anyone that has invented or innovated anything they stood to gain something from the act, wether it be fame, capital, ego, or status they all wanted more than was needed. And for the record I have nothing against any of the afor mentioned reasons.

Btw I'm done with this as its getting to that point of ideology and I don't want to step on anyone's toes sorry if my opinion offended anyone I'm out.

Patents are crap.
Nothing good comes from patents, they only serve to line the pockets of a select few and stall the technological development and advancement of mankind.

Not to mention that many of these patents are technological inevitabilities.

One can but wonder where we would be today if patents did not exist.
Or cartels for that matter.

I guess the big question really is, where would we be today if Greed didn't exist?
And then I don't meen wants and ambitions but pure unadulterated greed.

That's weird.

Lets consider that progress really began hand-in-hand with the adoption of patents. Without them, there is not nearly so much reason to be the one who forks out for the research, given that, once completed, anyone can take your design and sell it for the same price.

But that's fine, you're something like 10 years old, and the understanding of such things will come in time.

The problem isn't that patents are bad, it's that the government body in the US is atrocious and doesn't bother to look at prior arts, or require there be an existing prototype or implementation. It allows for obscure details. That's what needs to end, not patents themselves.

Very few, serious, people, believe that patenting, itself, is a bad thing. Just the current implementation of it allows for too much obscurity.

Patent and copyright laws in this country are the cause of stagnation and have been blocking and retarding advancement for a long time now.

the US patent office will give a patent for anything, apple just got one for curved glass.....(not kidding) as well as for simcard latches....

Disney has managed to extend copyright to protect sheet like steamboat mickey.....
they are hard at getting it extended again so in effect it will never end...

copyrights and patents where ment to be for the good of the public/citizens of this country, they where to encourage advancement and development for the benefit of society by giving invendors/creators a limited monopoly for a limited time, this is nolonger true, and nolonger serves the intended purpose, the only fix i see is to abolish them and start over because you CANT fix the system in place, the IP maximilists wont let it be fixed.....they want perpetual monopoly on anything and everything.....

read the history of these IP laws in the states to understand why I and many others say they are serving the opposite of their intended goal.